Re: SubscribeStar banning sexual content with characters that don't have "human-like knee orientation" fsjdkldbh

Tried to shitpost and got carried away lol
https://subscribestar.adult/prohibited_content

Wait, what? That's even more moronic than female presenting nipples!

Who cares what people do with animals anyway? Outside of vegan PETA nuts.
Anthropomorphic Characters
Sexual content involving anthropomorphic characters (commonly referred to as “furry” characters) may be permitted only when all of the following conditions are met:
the characters possess clearly humanoid anatomy (such as arms, human-like knee orientation, and an upright body posture)
Content depicting explicit sexual activity involving non-anthropomorphic animals (“feral” characters) is prohibited.
What a load of four-legged bull shit.
@cy @masklayer I'm very much against zoophilia, but these are not real people or animals. Some of these animals have sentience and moral agency. Anthropomorphism is not always visually represented. Do lions talk like these in Lion King? Visually these Disney lions are visually feral.
The idea is (sigh) that since actual zoophilia is bad, we should make zoophiles feel bad, and banning feral artwork (thus increasing incidences of animal abuse) is good because anything that makes them feel bad is good. I personally don't give a fuck about what animals do together, which helps keep me from getting outraged when I hear that zoophiles are not constantly miserable.

CC: @[email protected]